TrackingPoint: a military wolf in civilian sheep’s clothing?

My latest post is up over at PJ Media, a review of the technology of the TrackingPoint shooting system. I’m not impressed. Well, that isn’t true. I’m very impressed with the technology.

Readers responding on the PJM post seem to think I’ve got sour grapes, but I guess I didn’t explain myself very well. The technology in the scope, rifle and ammunition already exists, as do ballistic computers, wind gauges, etc. I think they are cool, and I’ve seen some really neat things done with them. The only thing really new in the system is the integration of the technologies into a single unit. It is evolutionary, not revolutionary.

Further, I don’t think the company is being honest about their market.

I simply don’t see a viable long-term civilian market for such a system.

Very few civilians can justify a highly specialized $22,000 rifle that comes in just two extremely specialized calibers with very specific loadings.

Long range civilian shooters enjoy the process of shooting, and this system removes that joy.

So who would be the real market for such a system? Who has:

deep pockets

hires people who shoot for living

has an affinity for long-range precision accuracy with as little collateral damage as possible

a demonstrated need to ramp up a large number of long-range shooters

needs to do all that while drastically reducing the amount of training time, skill-building, and natural talent found in the current development of a sniper?

If TrackingPoint can substantially reduce the amount of time needed to train a company or squad-level designated marksman, and give each designated marksman legitimate sniper range and increased first-shot hit capability, then we’re looking at a very cost-effective military force projection option. In my opinion, TrackingPoint was never really designed for civilian shooters. It was designed to increase use of precision small arms in the military.

.338 Lapua and .300 Winchester Magnum just so happen to be two of the three long-range anti-personnel sniping cartridges favored by the U.S. military (the third favored U.S. military sniping cartridge is the .50 BMG).

I think TrackingPoint is a military-focused shooting system, and speculate it was designed as such from the ground up. If you disagree, I’d really like to know why.

13 Comments

I agree. At that price it isn’t for the commercial market. But putting that in the hands of an untrained Fed makes him an instant threat. I wouldn’t want it anyway. Technology breaks. Rather build up the marksmanship skills to make precise long range shots on my own.

I haven’t any objections ! In the long-range shooting games such systems will likely be disallowed. I suppose some will use it for ultra-long range hunting, but why ? Shooting game at a distance it takes the rest of the morning to get to the kill for the obligatory “successful hunter photo-op” seems a worthless endeavor to me.

OTOH, such systems might just make the practice of political endeavor a more exacting task. IAC, having the disposable bucks to afford such a system generally mitigates against that sort of endeavor by most folks. Certainly well-funded terrorists could afford them. But with the price so high and production so low I suspect the many thousands of “G-Men” types could easily track these devices.

Tactically speaking, its a tool for assasination. The target can’t be moving… leastways from what I can tell. It’s designed to moderately update ranging and targeting data, but a ‘fast moving’ target is harder to hit. Its more lined up for hitting static targets. Or a target thats not moving -much-. Like someone at a desk, or a podium. Gives a neophyte a edge for hitting on the first shot… just my thoughts…

Mil-Dot in .308 has worked well from me since the early 90s. I’m not a Sniper, just one motivated former Marine who’s done his homework & range time.
Fundamentals gentlemen, and training. Get out there post haste.
Semper Fi.

I’m with Parabellum. This thing isn’t designed for our military — we would rather use snipers (or drone launched missiles.) This is designed for export to third world countries, where you can either spend $500K to send your “didn’t have shoes until last week” soldier to a real sniper school, or you can spend $22K on this.